


FC9 



H0LL1NGER 

pH 8J 

MILL RUN F3-1543 



E 420 
.F64 

Copy l SPEECH 



OF 



y 



MR. THOS. S. FLOUMOY, OF YA., 



ON THE 



CIVIL AND DIPLOMATIC BILL. 



DELIVERED S .■ "\ I 



IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES OF THE UNITED STATES, 



July 3d, 1848 



WASHINGTON: 

J. AND G. S. GIDEON, PRINTERS. 



1848. 






( / 



SPEECH. 



The House being in Committee of the Whole, and having under consideration the bill making 
appropriations for the Civil and Diplomatic expenses of the Government. 

Mr. FLOURNOY, of Virginia, addressed the Committee as follows : 

Mr. Chairman: I have listened with much attention to the remarks of the 
gentleman from Georgia, (Mr. Cobb,) and, though a gentleman of undoubted 
ability, he has not met the powerful argument of his colleague, (Mr. Toombs,) 
nor come to the rescue of the so-called Democratic Platform, which reeled 
and tottered under his heavy blows. He has consumed his whole hour, 
or nearly so, in assaults upon the Whig party, because the Philadelphia 
Convention did not erect for it, in modern phrase, a platform; because it did 
not adopt a string of resolutions as an expose of its political faith, by which to 
bind and pledge its nominees; and for its failure to do so, is pleased to charge 
it with error and inconsistency, and a design to practise a fraud upon the 
country. 

It is not my purpose, Mr. Chairman, to reply to these attacks of the gentle- 
man from Georgia at this time, or to analyze the rickety offspring of the Bal- 
timore Convention, presented with great parade and circumstance to the coun- 
try as the platform of Democratic principles. I have asked the attention of the 
committee, that I may present some views which I entertain upon a subject of 
deep and exciting interest to the whole country, and of vital interest to the 
South — I mean the institution of slavery — and to examine the attitude of 
the two great parties of the country — the Whig and Democratic — in refer- 
ence to it; or, in other words, to examine the position of the two parties in ref- 
erence to the so-called Wilmot proviso, and see which occupies the safe and 
more conservative position upon this all-absorbing question. I think that I 
shall be able to show that the South will find its safety in the elevation of the 
Whig party to power, and that it will be endangered, and the preservation of 
this Union put to hazard, by permitting the Government to remain in the pos- 
session of the Democratic party. 

It is not my purpose, Mr. Chairman, to enter into a discussion of the abstract 
question, or to inquire whether the institution of slavery be a moral, political, 
and social blessing or curse. If it be, as many suppose it, an evil, we of the 
South incur no moral responsibility by continuing its existence, for that is un- 
avoidable; and the South will ever be found ready to resist any and every en- 
croachment, from whatever quarter, upon her rights in connexion with this insti- 



4 - l 

tution. She sees involved in it her peace and her existence, and she will never 
consent that it shall become the foot-ball of party, be dragged into the political 
arena, and mingled with the party issues and party conflicts of the day, for the 
purpose of making or unmaking Presidents. It is a question that can never 
become, with propriety, an issue between the two great parties of the country, 
as at present organized; it is, in its very nature, sectional, and when parties 
divide upon it, the present party lines will be obliterated, and the division will 
be Northern and Southern. I have observed, during the present session, when- 
ever the question of slavery has been presented in any shape to the considera- 
tion of this body, the South, without distinction of party, have been united — 
Whigs and Democrats voting together to sustain her rights and interests, and 
Whigs and Democrats of the North voting pretty much together in support of 
northern views. What patriotic heart, Mr. Chairman, North or South, would not 
sicken and despond, and be filled with fearful forebodings for the future, in wit- 
nessing a struggle between the two great divisions of this Union, for the highest 
oflice within the gift of this great people, upon a local, sectional question? 

Mr. Chairman, in the name of those I have the honor to represent on this 
floor I protest — aye, solemnly protest — against mingling this question with the 
party issues and party elections of the country; as I love this Union, the glo- 
rious work and invaluable bequest of a noble and patriotic ancestry, I protest 
against it; it is a question above party, and demands, by its importance, that it 
shall stand separate from the party organizations of the day, and here, by its 
action, the Whig party has placed it. The Whig Convention, held in Phila- 
delphia on the 7th day of June, repudiated it as a party issue. After the ticket 
had been formed, presenting to the country, for President and Vice President, 
the names of Zachary Taylor and Millard Fillmore, resolutions containing the 
principles of the Wilmot proviso were twice offered to that body for its adop- 
tion, and as often laid on the table by an overwhelming majority, the vote in 
favor of laying them on the table being at least twenty to one; thus did that 
body declare, that this question had no proper connexion with the election of 
Chief Magistrate for this Republic, and ought not, and should not, control their 
votes in the approaching election; that it did not desire or intend to subject the 
interests of the South, connected with this absorbing question, to the hazard 
and danger which would inevitably result from dragging it into the arena of 
party politics, and connecting it with the excitements, prejudices, passions, 
interests, and tricks, which are inseparable from the contests and struggles of 
parties in Presidential elections. That Convention assembled in a spirit of 
patriotic devotion, looking alone to the peace, the prosperity, and the happiness 
of our whole country, and the preservation of this Union from the dangers 
which threaten it; it eschewed, as the Whig party has ever done, all identity,. 
as a party, with the interests or institutions of any particular locality or section: 



but kept itself, as it has hitherto done, and still does, aloof from all such entan- 
glements, so that when it gets into power, and the interests of the country are 
confided to a Whig administration, it may, untrammelled, look abroad upon the 
whole land, and by its action reconcile and harmonize the conflicting interests 
of the various members and sections of this great family of States, and advance 
the general prosperity; looking, as its guide, not to the platforms of party Con- 
ventions, but to the Constitution— the great charter of our liberty. 

Mr. Chairman, not only did the Whig Convention at Philadelphia, with an 
overwhelming majority, lay on tile table the resclutions offered to that brdy 
for i's arHti n, upon this vexed and disturbing question, but I have observed 
wi'h pleasure and satisfaction that he Whig people of the North are actuated 
by the same national and patriotic fee ing which controlled that Convention 
But the. other day, in the city of New York, at one of the largest gatherings of 
the people ever assembled in that great commercial emporium, numbering by 
report some thirty thousand or more, the following resolution was adopted 

by acclamation : , 

"Resolved, That we deprecate, sectional issues in , .national «jj-. * J^g&SoS 
Union and injurious to the public good ;_that we look w tl ) ^ n ™™™;°* mnc * n0 (aci[on 
^k^S^SS &£ E^S£- to ray one 
section of our common country in angry hostility against any other. 

Eut, sir, it has been asked, if the northern Whigs ry their votes in Conven- 
tion intended to indicate a change in their view as to the principles of the 
Wiln ot proviso. Upon this question I will not deceive myself, nor do in- 
tend to attempt to deceive others. The gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. 
Ashmun) says, that a majority of the members of that Convention from the 
North approve the principles of the proviso, and I do not suppose that their 
views are at all changed upon ihat question by the votes which they gave to 
lay it on the table; nor do I suppose that the Whigs of New York have chang- 
ed their opinions, but I imagine, that each and all of them, when called upon 
to vote, either in their individual or i epresentative capacities, would cast their 
vot. s in accordance with the. views which they have hitherto entertained upon 
this subject. But while their votes and acts will indicate no change of opinion, 
they declare this, that the Whigs of the North are net governed ry a wild, 
reckless, and- destructive fanaticism; that they love this Union, appreciate its 
benefits, and desire its preservation ; that they will not consent « to array one 
section of our common country in angry hostility against any other," by intro- 
ducing sectional issues it to a « National canvass." That they deprecate as 
dan-erous to our free institutions a geographical division of parties and that 
they do not intend to disregard the feelings, interests, and rights of the bouth, 
by connect ng this subject of sla.ery w th the triumphs or defeats of party; 
but desire to see i* kept separate and apart, to be considered upon its own 



6 

merits, without passion, and with that calmness and coolness which its import- 
ance demands. 

We have in all this, sir, assurance that the Whig party have a deep attach- 
ment to this Union, and that they will preserve it; that though there is much 
difference of opinion as to the powers of the Federal Government over the Ter- 
ritories, and as to the propriety of the exclusion of slavery, yet, when this 
question, which has been brought upon the country and into the councils of the 
nation by the acquisition of New Mexico and California, shall be presented 
for final settlement and adjustment, it will be considered and acted upon in a 
spirit of patriotism; the recollections of the past and the bright hopes of the fu- 
ture will not be disregarded. We shall see in union, strength, and a glorious 
destiny; in disunion, weakness, civil strife, and a gloomy and uncertain future. 
The memories of our fathers will not be forgotten; the spirit of concession and 
compromise which enabled them to frame this Government, and establish this 
Union for the preservation of that liberty which they so heroically won, and 
which we now enjoy, will be found still to exist in the bosoms of their des- 
cendants. 

Mr. Chairman, 1 will now look to the position of Ihe Democratic party upon 
this gre;.t question; (and, without question, ng the motives or the patriotism of 
t'entlemen on the opposite side of this Hall,) I think I shall be able to show, 
that by their course of policy the Democratic party have placed this peculiar 
institution of the South in a false and dangerous attitude. The Baltimore^Con- 
vention, constituting itself the. peculiar guardian of the interests of the South, 
has given the institution of slavery a prominent place in its platform of Demo- 
cratic principle? by the adoption of a resolution declarative of its opinions upon 
that subject, which is, however, couched in such language as to render it un- 
certain as to what extent it meant to deny the power of this Government over 
it — the members of that party on this floor disagreeing among themselves as to 
its proper construction :. and it is thus presented as an issue in the approaching 
Presidential election, and endeavored to be made a test of fitness for office, ex- 
posed to all the perils and disasters of party warfare. And, not content with 
the assumption that they stand erect upon this question, southern Democrats 
are almost daily rising in their places here, and asking how Zachary Taylor is 
upon it ? What are his opinions ? Will he veto the Wilmot proviso, if 
it should be passed by Congress ? I answer them that, as far as I am 
informed, he has said nothing upon that subject; he has never mentioned it or 
referred to it in any communication that I have seen from him; he has passed 
it by as a question not belonging to a National canvass. I will ask southern 
o-entlemen if they fear Zachary Taylor upon this question? Do they believe that 
he cannot be trusted when the rights of the South are involved ? If they do 
not fear him, why ask the question ? Do they expect to make the South believe 



that Lewis Cass has a higher and more especial regard for her peculiar interests 
than Zachary Taylor? In preferring this inquiry, our Democratic friends can- 
not have looked well to the position of Lewis Cass; they must have forgotten 
that he is but a new convert, if indeed he has really changed his opinion, and 
become a "Northern man with Southern principles." In examining the offi- 
cial paper (the Union) of March 2d, 1847, giving the proceedings of the Senate 
cf March 1st, 1847, I find the following report of a discussion between Mr. 
Miller and General Cass: 

"After General Cass had concluded his speech, in which he took the ground 
that it was improper at this time to adopt the Wilmot Proviso, because its adop- 
tion now might prevent the acquisition of any territory from Mexico — 

"Mr. Miller, of New Jersey, expressed his great surprise at the change in 
the sentiments of the Senator from Michigan, who had been regarded as the 
great champion of freedom in the Northwest, of which he was a distinguished 
ornament. Last year the Senator from Michigan was understood to be deci- 
dedly in favor of the Wilmot Proviso; and, as no reason had been stated for 
the change, he (Mr. M.) could not refrain from the expression of his extreme 
surprise. 

"Mr. Cass said that the course of the Senator from New Jersey was most ex- 
traordinary. Last year he (Mr. C.) should have voted for the proposition had 
it come up. But circumstances had altogether changed. The honorable Sen- 
ator then read several passages from the remarks as given above, which he had 
committed to writing, in order to refute such a charge as that of the Senator 
from New Jersey." 

So General Cass did not admit that he had changed his opinion as to the 
power of this Government over the question of slavery in the Territories, but 
denied the charge of the Senator from New Jersey. He thought it inexpedient 
to adopt the Wilmot Proviso at that time, as it might prevent the acquisition 
of any territory from Mexico. The change in his constitutional views is of a 
still more recent date; and, to what extent this change may have been effected 
by the prospect of a nomination by the Baltimore Convention for the high office 
of President, I will not pretend to say. I am not dealing with motives, but 
facts, from which others are as competent as myself to draw correct conclu- 
sions. General Cass is not a young and inexperienced politician; his friends 
represent him as an able man, a profound jurist, and ripe statesman. How, 
then, does it happen that, having formed a mature and deliberate opinion favor- 
able to the exercise of this power, he should have, in the last twelve months, 
changed that opinion, and now deny to Congress the power? Would it not at 
least be becoming in General Cass and his friends to be a little modest, and 
not be over anxious to press this question into the canvass? 

There is another fact that the people of the South have not forgotten. They 



have a vivid recollection that, in times gone by, there was another Northern 
Democrat who sought and won their confidence and support by making profes- 
sions of peculiar regard for Southern interests, and who was called, by way of 
distinction, "The Northern man with Southern principles." Where is he now, 
and what is his position? He is now the candidate of the Barnburners; he has 
turned with base ingratitude upon the South, and is the representative of a sec- 
tional organization, in open and avowed hostility to Southern interests and in- 
stitutions, and is the first example of one who has had the confidence and sup- 
port of the country for the highest office within the gift of this free people, who 
has been found ready to lend his name and influence, regardless of conse- 
quences, to such a mischievous and dangerous policy; and, should he succeed 
under the influence of a temporary and fanatical excitement, which God forbid, 
and which I do not fear, and the disunion of these States ensue, which would 
be inevitable, the good, the wise, and patriotic every where will heap bitter 
curses upon his head. Unborn generations Avill hold up, his name to the scorn 
and reproach of ages yet to come. History will record him as one who, for 
the gratification of his own selfish ambition, did not hesitate to sacrifice his 
own Government, the freest and best on earth, under the influence of whose 
example the thrones of the old world were toppling to their fall, and the prin- 
ciples of republican liberty making rapid progress to ultimate triumph. Sir, 
the treason of Arnold will be forgotten in view of the oreater baseness and 
treachery of Martin Van Buren. 

Mr Chairman, there is another striking difference in the policy of the^two 
great parties of this country, which has a material bearing upon this question 
of slavery. The Whig part} r is opposed to the acquisition of foreign territory; 
it is satisfied with the present limits of our country, and desires to preserve it 
as it is. The Democratic party is a party of progress. One of the leading fea- 
tures of its policy is "the extension of the area of human freedom." It was 
not satisfied with the annexation of Texas, but the President, by his indiscre- 
tion, involved us in an unnecessary, wasteful, and bloody war with Mexico, 
which has resulted in a still further extension of our territorial limits. By the 
treaty of peace we have acquired New Mexico and California. Which exten- 
sion of our boundary has brought upon us, with all its excitements, difficulties, 
and dangers, this unwelcome question, which I hope we shall be able to adjust 
upon fair and equitable terms. But, if we shall get safely out of this difficulty, 
have we, in the policy of the Democratic party, any security for the future? 
Can we indulge a reasonable hope, if it be permitted to remain in power, that 
this same question, with all its embarrassments, will not again be presented to 
distract and disturb the councils of the nation upon the first opportunity that 
shall offer to extend our borders? General Cass seems to have an insatiable, 
morbid appetite for territorial aggrandizement. His imagination has been 



fired by the poetic thought of an "Ocean-bound Republic," and bethinks "that 
we would not be much disfigured if we were to swallow the whole of Mexico.'* 
In reading the prospectus of the Campaign paper, issued from the office of the 
Union, in this city — the official paper, the organ of the Democratic party, and 
devoted to the election of General Cass, giving the plan and purposes, and 
commenting on the principles of Democracy — I find this striking paragraph: 

"It (the Democratic party) contends for the glory and honor of the Republic, and for its in- 
crease and expansion as time and circumstances may demand. It does not believe that the Mis- 
sissippi should have been its ultimate boundary, nor that its present boundaries should be per- 
manent; but it holds that this great and glorious Union shall grow and expand, and diffuse the 
blessings of liberty over other contiguous States and Territories, as destiny may dictate, and 
humanity and justice approve." 

The Democratic Platform has no resolution upon this subject. The Balti- 
more Convention passed it by in silence. But here we have a distinct avowal 
from high authority of the policy of the party; it accords well with its history 
for the last few years; and, if we are to judge by the past, we may well regard 
this as a faithful exposition of its future policy. It is in the frequent recur- 
rence of this question that there is danger to the country. It will come with 
accumulated difficulties and dangers upon every extension of our limits, and 
the true and wise course of the whole country is to avert it, maintain our pre- 
sent boundaries, and settle, by a fair, judicious, and liberal compromise, our 
present difficulties. 

This question has ever been regarded as fraught with imminent peril to the 

Republic. What was the language of Thomas Jefferson in reference to the 

Missouri question, which in its day agitated this country from its centre to its 

circumference, and filled the minds of all patriotic men with apprehension for 

its safety. These are his words : 

" This momentous question, like a fire-bell in the night, awakened and filled me with terror. 
I considered it at once as the knell of the Union. It is hushed, indeed, for the moment ; but 
this is a reprieve only, not a final sentence. A geographical line, coinciding with a marked prin- 
ciple, moral and political, once conceived and held up to the angry passions of men, will never 
be obliterated ; and every new irritation will mark it deeper and deeper." 

Then, sir, may I not ask if the interests of the South would not be safer under 

Whig than Democratic policy ? The policy of the Whig party is one of peace; 

it is opposed to wars of aggression and conquest; it concurs in opinion with 

Zachary Taylor, who, in his letter to Capt. Allison, says: 

" I look upon war, tit all times and under all circumstances, as a national calamity, to be 
avoided if compatible with the national honor. The principles of our Government, as well as 
its true policy, is opposed to the subjugation of other nations and the dismemberment of other 
countries by conquest. In the language of the great Washington, " Why should we quit our 
own to stand on foreign ground." 

By the elevation of the Whig party to power the present difficulties would 

be settled, and all cause of "new irritation" on this "momentous question' 

be removed ; but elect General Cass, and his policy of conquest and annexation 

would mark " deeper and deeper" this geographical line, to final separation. 

And, upon this position of the two parti.es, I am prepared to go before my con- 



stituents and the South, and claim for the Whig party their confidence and 
support. 

But, Mr. Chairman, our Democratic friends not only complain that General 
Taylor has said nothing upon the Wilmot Proviso, they make still further com- 
plaint, he refuses to give pledges to party; though a Whig, he is not an ultra 
one, and is determined, if elected, to enter upon his duties as Chief Magistrate 
untrammelled, looking to the Constitution alone as his rule of conduct. This, 
sir, in my humble opinion, is a proud, lofty, and patriotic position ; it is the 
true Republican ground, and has for its sanction the example of no less a name 
than that of the immortal Washington; it ought and does recommend him most 
strongly to the country. 

General Cass, however, is not obnoxious to this complaint; none suspect him 
of a want of devotion to party; his course in the Senate of the United States 
exhibits him as an extreme and ultra partisan. He was never, I believe, a 
member of any legislative body, except for a short time of the Ohio legisla- 
ture, in early life. From that time to the election of James K. Polk, he held 
office by Executive appointment with but little interruption, and was elected 
to the Senate about the time Mr. Polk was elected President. The Baltimore 
Convention of 1844 presented to the country its platform of principles, and 
among the resolves was one declaring our right to the whole of Oregon, up to 
54° 40', to be clear and unquestionable. The nominee, Mr. Polk, pledged 
himself to carry out the views and opinions of that Convention, and accord- 
ingly in his message to Congress asserted the extreme claim. General Cass 
maintained and defended the views of the President and the Convention, and 
insisted upon 54° 40'. Congress was for many months engaged in a most ex- 
citing and stormy debate upon the question. The country was agitated and 
excited in apprehension of war with England. It seemed inevitable. General 
Cass declared it to be inevitable. The Senator from Ohio, (Mr. Allen,) said 
that "the heart of the American people must be prepared for war." Our 
minister, however, negotiated a treaty, and settled upon the forty-ninth par- 
allel of latitude. Mr. Polk's nerves gave way, and he sought to relieve him- 
self by placing the responsibility upon the Senate. That patriotic body advised 
the ratification of the treaty, and saved the two countries from a bloody and 
expensive war. General Cass, however, true to the extreme demands of party, 
urged its rejection, and voted in a minority of fourteen against advising its 
ratification. This embarrassment being removed Mr. Polk turned upon Mexico, 
and by his unwise and imprudent course involved us in an unnecessary and 
wasteful war with that country, which war has just terminated, after more than 
two years duration, the expenditure of millions upon millions of the public 
money, and the loss of the lives of many thousands of our best citizens. We 
find General Cass still true to party, sustaining and defending the Administra- 



11 

tion at every step from its inception to its termination. And after Mr. Trist 
had negotiated a treaty of peace, and the Senate of the United States had rati- 
fied it with a few modifications, which rendered it necessary to return it to 
Mexico for the approval of the Mexican government, General Cass still urged 
upon the Senate the passage of the Ten Regiment bill. It finally passed that 
body by a party vote, and was only prevented from becoming a law by the 
Whig majority in this House; and results have made it manifest that the only 
effect of its passage would have been to increase the patronage of the President 
by giving him the appointment of some five hundred officers. As we advance 
the evidence thickens. At the last session of Congress, General Cass voted 
for the River and Harbor bill. Mr. Polk vetoed it. The Baltimore Conven- 
tion nominated General Cass for President, and adopted a resolution repudiating 
internal improvement by the General Government. General Cass cordially 
approved it in condemnation of his own vote. The Democrats of the North 
and Northwest, however, say that the resolution of the Convention will not pre- 
vent General Cass from approving the River and Harbor bill. What say our 
Democratic friends of the South, who approve Mr. Polk's veto? Is he to be 
represented at the South as opposed to internal improvements, and at the North 
and West as the advocate of the improvement of rivers and harbors ? "There 
are no tricks in plain and simple faith." 

This is not all; the evidence of Gen. Cass's devotion to party does not stop' 
here; after the battles of Palo Alto and Resaca de la Palma, which were won 
so triumphantly, with a force greatly inferior to that of the enemy in point of 
numbers, Gen. Taylor continued his march on the city of Monterey, and with 
6,000 troops attacked that city, fortified and defended by an army of 10,000: 
the fierce and dreadful struggle continued for more than two days, when the 
enemy was compelled to surrender, and deliver up the city to Gen. Taylor. 
Terms of capitulation were agreed upon by a commission appointed by the 
commanders of each army; the commission on the part of the army of the 
United States was composed of the gallant and distinguished officers Worth. 
Henderson, and Davis, who agreed upon aud approved the terms of the capit- 
ulation and armistice. The news of this brilliant victory was received with 
pride and exultation by the whole people, but James K. Polk, Commander-in- 
Chief of the Army and Navy, disapproved of the terms of the surrender. Af- 
terwards, a resolution tendering the thanks of Congress to Gen. Taylor for his 
victory at Monterey was offered to this body; immediately the following pro- 
viso was offered: "Provided that nothing herein contained shall be construed 
into an approbation of the terms of the capitulation of Monterey. " This proviso 
was annexed to the resolution of thanks by the vote of the Democratic party 
of this body; it was reported to the Senate for its adoption; Mr. Speight 
moved to amend the resolution by striking out the proviso, and Gen. Case- 



12 

voted in a minority of 15 against striking out; thus endeavoring to make it a 
resolution of censure, instead of thanks, offering that brave and gallant old 
soldier an insult instead of praise. What renders the vote of Gen. Cass the 
more remarkable is, that he, too, claims to be a soldier, and to have rendered 
his country some service upon the battle-field during the war of 1812, and his 
friends have conferred on him the distinguished appellation of "the hero of 
Hull's surrender;" but, forgetful of the soldier's sensibility, (how keenly he is 
alive to every impulse of honor, and how deeply wounded by a sense of injus- 
tice,) endeavored, at the behest of part}', to prevent the expression by Con- 
gress of a nation's gratitude to him who had shed new lustre upon her arms 
by his unrivalled achievements. It is said that this proviso was not regarded 
as a 'censure; that Congress refused to vote it a censure. The amendment, 
offered by a gentleman not now a member of this body, to add the word "dis- 
approbation," &c, that it might appear that Congress meant to express no 
opinion, was rejected, thereby fixing its character beyond dispute. The people 
so considered it, and many who voted for it lost their seats upon this floor. 

In the progress of this war with Mexico many difficulties occurred betAveen 
the President and the commanding officers. The first was with Gen. Scott; 
he was notified that his services would not be required in Mexico — Gen. Tay- 
lor was then high in the confidence of the Administration. On the 3d of July, 
1846, I find in the Union, the "mouth-piece" of the President, the following 
tribute to this officer: 

" The public sentiment in the South is highly favorable to General Taylor. In fact, he has 
' won golden opinions' from all classes and from all sections of the country. 

" The New Orleans Times of the 26th of May describes ' the largest meeting which it has 
ever seen in New Orleans, congregated within the walls of a public edifice.'' It took place on the 
evening before, at the new Exchange. 'All that is distinguished for rank, talent, wealth, and 
influence of every shade of political opinion, were found there.' The object was to pour forth 
the popular feeling on the late brilliant achievements on the Rio Grande. 

"The whole press of New Orleans and Mobile, Democrat or Whig, expresses its admiration 
md confidence in the commanding general, and protests against his being superceded by any 
other, however brave or distinguished." 

After the battle of Monterey, not less brilliant than either Palo Alto or Re- 
saca de la Palma, "a change came over the spirit of his dream." The quarrel 
between Gen. Scott and the President was reconciled, and Scott sent to take 
the chief command in Mexico. He had scarcely entered upon his line of ope- 
rations when the President conceived that the public interest required the crea- 
tion of a new office in the army, the office of Lieutenant General, and recom- 
mended to Congress the passage of a law for that purpose. After much diffi- 
culty, and repeated attempts, the bill passed the House. Its object was to su- 
percede both General Taylor and Scott, the two men who rank first among all 
the military men of the age, and subject them to the command of a distin- 
guished civilian, and distinguished only as a civilian, Col. Thomas H. Ben- 
ton; for it was well understood at the time that, if the power was given to the 



13 

President, the appointment would have been conferred on him. When this 
bill was before the Senate, Mr. Mangum moved that it lie on the table, and 
said that he moved it as a test vote. Gen. Cass voted against it in a minority 
of 21. These are a few of the most prominent acts, during a space of little 
more than three years, by which Gen. Cass has established his claim to the 
title of an extreme ultra partisan. 

But, sir, it seems that he was not entirely satisfied that his claim should res* 
upon this evidence. In his letter accepting the nomination of the Baltimore 
Convention, approving entirely and pledging himself to the support of its Plat- 
form, he says: 

" The very first article in the Democratic creed teaches that the people are competent to gov- 
ern themselves ; it is, indeed, rather an axiom than an article of political faith. From the days 
of General Hamilton to our days, the party opposed to us — of" whose principles he was the 
great exponent, if not the founder — while it has changed its name, has preserved essentially its 
identity of character ; and the doubt he entertained and taught of the capacity of man for self- 
government, has exerted a marked influence upon its action and opinions. Here is the very 
starting-point of the difference between the two great parties which divide our country. All 
other differences are but subordinate and auxiliary to this, and may, in fact, be resolved into it." 

Here, then, at the very moment that he accepts the nomination, and hopes 
to be elected to preside over the country under the influence of his attachment 
to party, he asperses the opinions, conduct, and motives of at least one-half of 
the American people. 

Since Gen. Cass has thought proper to tender this issue in the approaching 
election, let us for a moment try the two great parties, and their leaders, upon 
it. The Whig party had its origin in its opposition to Executive abuse and en- 
croachment. Every step of its history has been marked by its resistance to 
the improper and unconstitutional exercise of Executive power, to restrain it 
within its proper limits, and to give effect to the popular will, fairly expressed 
through the representatives of the people in Congress. Gen. Taylor, in his 
letter to Capt. Allison, assumes the same position. I give his own language: 

" The power given by the Constitution to the Executive to interpose his veto is a high con- 
servative power, but in my opinion should never be exercised except in cases of clear violation 
of the Constitution, or manifest haste and want of consideration by Congress. Indeed, I have 
thought that, for many years past, the known opinions and wishes of the Executive have exer- 
cised undue and injurious influence upon the legislative department of the Government; and for 
this cause I have thought our system was in danger of undergoing a great change from its true 
theory. The personal opinions of the individual who may happen to occupy the Executive 
chair ought not to control the action of Congress upon questions of domestic policy ; nor ought 
his objections to be interposed where questions of constitutional power have been settled by the 
various departments of Government, and acquiesced in by the people. 

" Upon the subject of the tariff", the currency, the improvement of our great highways, 
rivers, lakes, and harbors, the will of the people, as expressed through their representatives in 
Congress, ought to be respected and carried out by the Executive. " 

The Democratic party, on the other hand, has ever been found ready to de- 
fend and sustain the Executive department in all its demands. 1 recollect no 
instance in which it has interjjosed to arrest the exercise of Executive power 
and prerogative. When the will of the people, expressed through their Rep- 
resentatives in Congress, has been vetoed by the President, it has rallied to his 



14 

support and sustained the act. It is unnecessary to enumerate the various in- 
stances of Executive encroachments, commencing with the removal of the de~ 
posites from the United States Bank. They are familiar to the country: and no 
one has more readily yielded his support to Executive demands and encroach- 
ments than Gen. Cass. Executive power and prerogative have rapidly increased 
under Democratic rule, until we find the republican position of General Taylor 
— "that the will of the people, as expressed through their representatives in 
Congress, ought to be respected and carried out by the Executive" — fiercely 
assailed upon this floor, and by the Democratic press throughout the country. 
Yet, sir, it is claimed that the capacity of man for self-government is the lead- 
ing, fundamental distinction between the two parties; it may be so; but the po- 
sition of parties should be reversed. The doubt is with the miscalled Demo- 
cratic party. As a charge upon the Whig party, it is unjust and unfounded, 
and refuted by its whole history, from its organization to the present hour. 
It has presented to the country for its support for President one, the leading 
feature of whose administration will be to carry into execution the will of this 
great people, fairly and deliberately expressed by their representatives, within 
constitutional limits. Gen. Zachary Taylor is emphatically the people's man; 
and the Convention at Philadelphia but gave utterance to the wish of the peo- 
ple, as indicated all over the country, and in many instances without distinction 
of party, through mass meetings, State conventions, Stc, in selecting him as 
their candidate for the Presidency. 

He does not suit the mere partisan. Though a Whig, he will give no pledges 
to party. He has "no enemies to punish, and nothing but his country to serve. " 
He will go into office untrammelled. He is neither a Northern man with South- 
ern principles, nor a Southern man with Northern principles. He is an Ameri- 
can, whose patriotism is co-extensive with the broad limits of his whole country. 
He will not be the President of a party or section, but the President of the Na- 
tion; and will endeavor, by a wise, prudent, and just administration, to protect 
the interests of every portion of this wide spread Republic, and advance the 
prosperity of the whole. 

It is said, though, that he is deficient in capacity; that he does not write his 
despatches and letters, they are written by some one else. I will call the venera- 
ble editor of the Union to the witness stand once more, and only once, and hear 
his evidence upon this point. In the Union of the 29th May, 1846, I find this 
high testimony: 

" The Pen worthy of the Sword. — Nothing can be more happy, appropriate, yet dignified, than 
the despatches from General Taylor. They are worthy of the man and of the occasion which 
has called them forth. We thoroughly agree with the compliment that the New Orleans Cou- 
rier pays to the general order of General Taylor, ' giving thanks to his troops for their bravery 
and good conduct. The American reader will remark with pride and pleasure the striking con- 
trast it exhibits to the tedious, bombastic, extravagant, vainglorious productions of the Mexican 
Generals. The neatness of its style is admirable — not a word too much, or in the wrong place 



15 

— all in fine keeping with the energy and decision with which his military operations are con- 
ducted.' " 

The veteran Gen. Gibson says that he served with him on seventeen courts 
martial, and that Gen. Taylor was invariably selected to draw up the reports 
and proceedings of the court, some of which were very voluminous. 

The testimony of the Honorable John C. Spencer, late Secretary of War, 
of Colonel Humphrey Marshall, of Kentucky, and of General Persifer F. 
Smith, is equally conclusive. Evidence on this subject might be multiplied, 
but it is unnecessary. Such charges will pass, like the idle wind, unheeded. 
In Gen. Taylor the people see those high qualities which fit him for the highest 
station — a sound judgment, unsurpassed discretion, and incorruptible integrity. 
He is the man of the age, and peculiarly adapted to the crisis. In his election 
the drooping hopes of the patriot will revive, and he will indulge bright anticipa- 
tions for the future; he sees in Zachary Taylor one who refuses to stand upon 
the platform of party, but takes his position upon the higher and broader plat- 
form — the Constitution, and brings to its interpretation a pure heart and clear 
head, having no purpose but the good of his country. 



. trrORY OF CONGRESS 

■111 

011 897 oio 



H0LL1NGER 
pH 8J 

MILL RUN F3-1543 



